Presentation by Blümmel, M., Tarawali, S.A.T., Teufel, N. and Wright, I.A. at the 5th All Africa Conference on Animal Agriculture and the 18th Annual Meeting of the Ethiopian Society of Animal Production (ESAP), Addis Ababa, October 25-28, 2010
Advantages of Hiring UIUX Design Service Providers for Your Business
Dual-purpose crop development, fodder trading and processing pptions for improved feed value chains
1. Dual-Purpose Crop Development, Fodder Trading and Processing Options for Improved Feed Value Chains Blümmel M 1 ., S.A.T Tarawali 2 , N. Teufel 1 and I. A. Wright 1 International Livestock Research Institute, India 1 and Ethiopia 2 Fifth All African Conference on Animal Agriculture, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia October 25 – 28, 2010
2.
3. Key feed sources in India: 2003 and 2020 (summarized from NIANP, 2005 and Ramachandra et al., 2007 ) Feed Resource % Crop Residues Planted fodder crops 2003 2020 44.2 69.0 34.1 ? Greens (F/F/CPR/WL) 17.8 ? Concentrates 3.9 7.3
7. Type and cost of sorghum stover traded monthly 2004-2005 in Hyderabad, India Blümmel and Parthasarathy, 2006 Stover type Price IR / kg DM Andhra 3.52 b Andhra Hybrid 3.15 cd Ballary Hybrid 3.54 b Raichur 3.89 a Rayalaseema 3.23 c Telangana (Local Y) 3.06 d
8. Relation between digestibility and price of sorghum stover Premium Stover “ Raichur” Low Cost Stover “ Local Yellow” Blümmel and Parthasarathy, 2006
9. Price variations in different sorghum stover traded concomitantly in Mieso, Ethiopia, April 2007 Source: calculated from Gebremedhin et al. 2009 Note: In India SS stover have about 3-4 units higher digestibility than GS stover Stover ETB/kg Trader ETB/kg Farm Sweet Sorghum (SS) 0.65 0.20 “ Grain” Sorghum (GS) 0.50 0.13 Price premium 30% 54%
10. Price: quality relation estimates in rice straw traded monthly in Kolkata from 2008 to 2009 Teufel et al. 2010 (less successful in establishing price: quality relations in wheat straw trading)
13. Stover digestibility and grain yield in new sorghum cultivars release-tested in India between 2002 and 2008 Blümmel et al. 2010
14. Stover digestibility and stover yield in new sorghum cultivars release-tested in India between 2002 and 2008 Blümmel et al. 2010
15. Stover yields and grain yields in new sorghum cultivars release-tested in India between 2002 and 2007
16.
17. Variation in food-feed crop traits within 256 full-sib progenies of pearl millet cultivar ICMV 221 Bidinger et al. (2006) Experimental varieties :” dual purpose” and “ grain” generated Bidinger et al. 2006 Variable Mean Range Grain yield (kg/ha) Stover yield (kg/ha) Stover digestibility (%) 3561 3617 43.6 2719 to 4154 ** 2783 to 5005 ** 40.7 to 46.1 **
18. Original and experimental pearl millet stover ICMV 221 tested with sheep (2 selection cycles ) Bidinger et al. 2009 Selection criterion Digestible Intake Grain yield Original ICMV 221 29.2 g/kg LW .75 /d 3 110 kg/ha Exp: Dual Purpose 221 31.5 “ 3 250 “ Exp: Grain 221 27.5 “ 3 110 “ Significance (P <) 0.0001 ns
19.
20. Live weight gains in sheep fed exclusively on groundnut haulms Prasad et al. 2010 Groundnut cultivars Gain (g/d) ICGV 89104 137 ICGV 9114 123 TMV 2 111 ICGS 76 76 ICGS 11 76 DRG 12 66 ICGS 44 65 ICGV 86325 83 ICGV 92020 95 ICGV 92093 109 Prob > F 0.02
21. Comparisons of on farms advantage of improved dual purpose groundnut and traditional cultivar in 3 villages of Anantapur High adoption incentive through moderate but accumulating advantages Cultivars Pod yield Haulm yield Milk yield TMV2 2.24 t/ha 2.64 t/ha 3.92 kg/d ICGV 91114 2.57 t/ha 3.08 t/ha 4.36 kg/d 15 % 17 % 10 %
25. Comparisons of high and low quality sorghum stover based feed blocks in commercial dairy buffalo Anandan et al. (2009a) Block High Block Low CP 17.2 % 17.1% ME (MJ/kg) 8.46 MJ/kg 7.37 MJ/kg DMI 19.7 kg/d 18.0 kg/d DMI per kg LW 3.6 % 3.3 % Milk Potential 16.6 kg/d 11.8 kg/d
26. Supplementation and processing of sweet sorghum bagasse and response in sheep Anandan et al. (2009b) Mash Pellets Block Control Chaffed SSBRL Concentrate DMI (g/kg LW) 52.5 a 55.6 a 42.1 b 41.5 b ADG (g / d) 132.7 a 130.4 a 89.5 b 81.3 b Processing ($/t) 5.9 7.0 5.2 1.7 Transport ($/t/100km) 6.6 5.8 5.2 13.5
27.
28.
29. Thank you for your attention Acknowledgement : The inputs and suggestions of Alan Duncan, Bruno Gerard and Andre Van Rooyen for this presentation are appreciated